Thanks to Eric and others for their input. I'll share my presentation via
slideshare once completed.
Please continue to share your insights :)
Kind Regards,
Frederic
________________________________
From: Eric Wolf <[email protected]>
To: "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <[email protected]>
Cc: Frederic Julien <[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] OSM Data Quality
Bob,
Hosting a private OSM is exactly what USGS is doing with the National Map Corps:
http://navigator.er.usgs.gov/
A fundamental problem with a "locking" feature is that it assumes the
authority that holds the lock is able to produce the highest quality
data. This is anathema to the spirit of OSM.
-Eric
-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Frederic,
>
>
>
> I’ve mentioned this before (and haven’t seen a solution back yet), but a
> method for organizations to take responsibility for an area and maintain
> specific items in that area.
>
>
>
> I work for the City of Saint Paul. OSM is not of any use to us unless I
> upload our data. As an example dataset, let’s use our Street Centerlines,
> which we have a lot of time invested in keeping up to date and spatially
> accurate. We do this by mandate and get paid to do it. If these features
> are added to OSM, there is no way to maintain (keep them locked up edit
> wise) for only our staff to adjust.
>
>
>
> We actually want to become the custodians of this type of data (amoung
> others) for a particular bounding area, and want others to tell us when the
> data is incorrect. Until this type of feature control is in place, it’s not
> easy for me to push for OSM adoption at our organization, or others that use
> our datasets.
>
>
>
> One thought I had was to host a private OSM service that could be mixed into
> the open data side in some manner. I’m open to further discussions on this
> topic, and truthfully I haven’t looked back at OSM for over a year now, so
> something may be in place for this type of usage that I don’t know about.
>
>
>
> Bobb
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Geowanking [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Frederic Julien
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 12:22 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Geowanking] OSM Data Quality
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I'm working on a presentation and interested to hear your thoughts. What are
> the top 2-3 changes that could improve OSM data quality? That could be
> processes, tools, methods, training, peer review, attributes, etc.
>
>
>
> If this sort of info is available elsewhere let me know.
>
>
>
> Looking forward to your answers.
>
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
>
> Frederic
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
>
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
